any hopes of a cease-fire are now fading. >> we'll go live to gaza during a jam-packed friday. it's "the cycle" for november 16th. >> today, my friends, we have a theme show. we'll be cycling in one lane, so to speak. washington is transfixed by two things. the white house debt talks, part of the larger negotiations about the fiscal slope, and the general petraeus testimony about benghazi. all the good stuff happening hundred doll behind closed doors, of course. we start with the white house meetings. the same key players from the past two years are involved, but this time the president has a lot more leverage. he earned political capital in the election. how will he spend it? let's get started. we have all sides of washington covered with mike viqueira at

the white house. was any progress made today? >> reporter: they say they wren weren't real nxs per se. it was each side putting up their opening bid. it's clear they want to do something major this year, not just kick the can down the road. of course, they see themselves as having the upper hand. they want to press the political advantage. there will be discussions over the next several days. congress for all intents and purposes and larges part of this city in the beltway empty out over the thanksgiving holiday next week. i'm told the president was very clear on taxes privately as he has been publicly in terms of the upper income americans getting higher rates or feeling some pain one way or the other. most see that as the place for the wiggle room. the president is open to suggestions on how to address entitlements. that, of course, is something republicans insist on. here's a little bit of the president from inside the roosevelt room this morning. >> we're all aware that we have

some urgent business to do. our challenge is to make sure that, you know, we are able to cooperate together, work together, find some common ground, make some tough compromises, build some consensus to do the people's business. my hope is that this is going to be the beginning of a fruitful process where we're able to come to an agreement that will reduce our deficit in a balanced way. we're also going to be focusing on making sure that middle class families are able to get ahead. >> toure, that sticking point shyer end tax rates. republican leaders insist that rank and file won't go along with it short term or long term, it doesn't marrtter. if he makes concessions on entitlements, he has to keep them in line. >> somehow you make me feel optimistic. luke, are you going to puncture

my bubble? what was the reaction on the hill? >> no, i won't, toure. some complementary things said from an aide close to speaker boehner saying it was a very productive, positive meeting there with the president at the white house. the most interesting thing, though, from the boehner aide was that john boehner believes there is not enough time from now until the end of the year to actually have a grand bargain. there's enough time, though, to put together the framework for what a grand bargain would look like. essentially have the top lines agreed to that by sometime in 2013 you could have both the chambers, the senate and the house, come together on some substantial tax reform, entitlement reform, and get rid of the sort of automatic cuts that we see as a sequester, and the tax increases and have a mechanism you can replace them with. listen to the congressional leaders in their photo op in the white house before thanksgiving that they had today. >> we've put revenue on the

table, as long as it's accompanied by significant spending cuts. >> we have a cornerstones of being able to work something out. we're both going to have to give up some of the things that we know are a problem. >> we should have a goal in terms of how much deficit reduction. we should have a deadline before christmas. >> we fully understand that you can't save the country until you have sbimgentitlements programs fit america in the coming years. >> there you see it, toure. quite positive thoughts from the congressional leaders. what's the thing they all did not talk about there outside the white house? what to do about those two 250 and above bush tax cuts. that is the sticking point in any single day. mike said that's where the wig am room is. they all avoided talking about the elephant in the room, which is the 250 and above tax cuts. that's the issue that is central

to any sort of compromise moving forward. guys, some positive messages at d.c. before thanksgiving. they look good for the cameras. we'll see if this comes around december 31st. >> all right. nbc's luke russert and mike, thanks to both of you. we bring in our dynamic economic duo, peter morici and jerrold bernstein. jared. i'll start with you. i'm puzzled about the national conversation we're having here about the fiscal cliff or as i call it the gradual fiscal slope. the premise is you have automatic spending cut that are scheduled to trigger on january 1st. what we hear is panic over the prospect of austerity. the economy is weak and fragile, and we can't have austerity at this time. that makes sense. why isn't the conversation about stimulating the economy at all? >> it's a great question.

in fact, behind the scenes there have been some discussions about that. one of the aspects of the fiscal cliff that gets less attention is the fact that the payroll tax cut, which is now 120 billion in the 2012 economy, is also part of cliff. that ends at the end of this year. there has been some internal discussions i understand about something that might replace that. there's been internal discussions about continuing unemployment insurance, which remains important. we still center a highly elevated unemployment rate with lots of long term. don't be totally discouraged about that. they're not the top line items. let me say one thing about the meeting today. very clearly these guys were getting along at 40,000 feet up. i'm not saying that dismissively because they haven't gotten along at 40 or 80,000, so that's good. all the commentary that says once you get below the clouds, it's tough, that's true, too. >> peter, in the press conference on wednesday, the president said that the math

tends not to work when you try to solve the deficit by capping deductions and closing loopholes. but groups like the committee for responsible federal budget say otherwise. they say that eliminating or even limiting tax breaks could raise the same amount of revenue as raising tax rates on highest earni earners. does the math tend not to work, or does the president not want the math to work? >> it depends on how you structure the sentence. if you say closing the loopholes and limiting deductions for folks over 250,000 is not enough, that's true. if you say closing the loopholes and limiting deductions or raising rates for folks over 250,000, then the semantics works because limiting deductions for everybody, that would start to get you the kind of money that the president wants. i don't think we're going to come up with $150 billion a year, $140 billion a year, 1.6 over ten years, whatever, by

merely he closing loopholes and limiting deductions for folks over 250,000. i don't think you get there that way. moreover, i think that long term if we look at the way entitlement spending has been growing and the limits for what both political parties are really willing to accept in terms of disappointing people, we're likely looking at first a tax on the wealthy, and then down the road, as the economy improves, higher taxes for everyone. that 47% number becoming a lot smaller than it once was. >> jared, as you're watching these negotiations unfold, what is your sort of -- what's your hope? what would be the ideal, grand bargain in your view? >> well, my ideal grand bargain would be something that prevented going over the fiscal cliff, and it was nice to hear pleasant sounds in that regard today. you know, i was there when it wasn't enough to negotiate with john boehner because he couldn't

bring his troops along. i'm not convinced he can bring a deal that includes new revenue back to the table. so i guess what i'd like to start seeing is more sounds from folks who have traditionally not been with their leader on the republican side making the same kinds of compromising noises from the leadership. >> peter, first off, i have to say at the risk of jinxing myself on the whole show, you're playing nicely together today. it's going nicely. >> it's a new era. >> we'll see. peter, i believe that a deal will be reached at some point in some way. if no deal is reached, what is the impact on the average person? >> that would be devastating, because their taxes would go up and the economy would tank at the same time. you simply can't withdraw $500 billion worth of spending from the u.s. economy by raising taxes and cutting government spending at the same time. that's more than 2% of gdp, and

the economy is only growing at 2%. it's an absurd thing to try to do. more than that, though, i want you to recognize that the kind of deal that they seem to be cooking up in the clouds, namely cutting taxes -- raising taxes by 150 billion and boehner getting his way, cutting spending by $150 billion, that's $300 billion, that's a lot of negative stimulus also. it might not be 500 but 300 is a locality. >> i think steve said something about a gradual slope ned of a cliff. the cataclysmic that he was talking about. initially those kinds of tax increases don't kick in until much later. they're now talking about pushing back spend cuts as well. look, peter is right. we're looking at fiscal contraction next year, and it gets back to the first set of comments. that's not what you want to see

about an economy growing around 2% with a highly elevated employment rate. let's not forget about the jobs part of this, and also let's not forget that temporary spending on similtimulus measures is nott causes the problems. the permanent stuff hurts us. >> it's not a apocalypse if we go over, a slope. >> i don't aagree wigree with t. >> i'll take it from jared. good. >> i think this is a fairly clear -- think of tax -- taxes would go up to 2013 and they don't show in your tax bill until you fill your taxes out in 2014. treasury doesn't have to change. they don't have to change the way. >> withholding? >> they don't have to change it. >> we want the positive news. we have to go. peter, jared, thank you very much. up next, a check on the other big news stories today. the standoff in gaza and petraeus on the hill and plus much more ahead on this fiscal

slope on friday. it's an impact on the states with a democrat and republican govern governor. sly stone right here. is what drives us to broadcast the world's biggest events in 3d, or live to your seat high above the atlantic ocean. it's what drives us to create eco-friendly race tracks, batteries that power tomorrow's cars, nearly indestructible laptops, and the sustainable smart towns of the future. at panasonic, we're driven to make what matters most better. just another way we're engineering a better world for you.

this reduced sodium soup says it may help lower cholesterol, how does it work?

you just have to eat it as part of your heart healthy diet. step 1. eat the soup. all those veggies and beans, that's what may help lower your cholesterol and -- well that's easy [ male announcer ] progresso. you gotta taste this soup.

the situation is deteriorates around israel as a rocket from the gaza strip hit just outside of jerusalem today, another hit tel aviv. it's a major escalation of this week's attacks that killed 24 palestinians and 3 israelis. nbc news foreign correspondent ayman is gaza. it was thought both jerusalem and tel aviv were out of range

for gaza rockets, so how does this change things? >> reporter: well, it definitely has a lot of significant implications on the ground for these developments. one, it really raises questions about the ongoing military operation. early on the israelis said that they had destroyed a significant portion of hamas's ability to fire long-range rockets and more importantly they said with the assassination or killing of the topham mass comma-- top hamas a fired rockets into israel hitting two of the most sensitive places of israel. essentially a game changer, and it's recharging the cal lags, if you will, for israeli officials who have deployed thousands of troops along the border. some anticipate this could be the precise moment there could be a ground invasion to suppress that rocket fire. more importantly, it's going to

have a humanitarian toll on the he people of gaza. it's densely populated. when it invades gaza, civilians have the brunt of it. six children died. it's a dire humanitarian situation. there's growing concern as it to what the new calculus would bring for the people of gaza for the civilian population here. so far there's no end in sight or truth being brokered, and that's why it's safe to say that fear is definitely the reigning sentiment among the people of gaza so far. s.e. >> stay safe. now to the spin cycle. back here david petraeus testified behind closed doors today in front of the house and senate intelligence committees about the events surrounding the deadly september 11th attack on the u.s. embassy in benghazi. according to lawmakers inside the hearings, petraeus believed all aalong the attack was a coordinated terrorist effort, despite the fact that the

administration's statements did not reflect that assessment. guys, it turns out we had a couple moles in the hearing. we had peter king, congressman from new york, and adam ship, congressman from california. they both gave thifr interpretations. peter king said petraeus said he didn't know who are on when the cia intelligence talking points were edited, and shift said that petraeus said that the reason they were edited was to protect classified information. now, i talked to a former cia counterintelligence official today who said that both of those aassessessments can't rea live in the same word, so maybe there's some misinterpretation of what petraeus said. you can't believe on the one hand petraeus didn't know why the talking points were edited and on the other he had a

perfectly good explanation for why the points were edited. make we'll get more on that. i think that we have a deeper understanding here after today about why david petraeus so badly want upped to come out and set the record straight. he didn't want on record that cia intelligence was bad and that was the reason. so that "wall street journal" report we saw yesterday talking about petraeus in his final days at the cia really wanting to come out and talk publicly. we have a greater sense of why that was. of all the agencies and departments that have their hands in the libya affair, cia, dod, state, white house, fbi, i think it's clear that the cia's jurisdiction in a lot of what happened was probably minimal. that makes petraeus's downfall all the more sad, because i think of everyone the cia and david petraeus probably had the

cleanest hands in all of this. we have to see. we obviously have plenty more questions going forward. >> to your point, s.e., it shows his resignation was over the extra-marital affair. >> yeah. >> i want to take a step back here on this whole issue. i mean, i think -- let me start by saying that i think the questions about the security at the consulate in benghazi are legitimate questions that deserve investigation. the thing that republicans have really glomed onto is what susan rice said on face the nation. i want to play her comments so we can put that in context. >> i understand you have been saying that you think it was sfont n spontaneous. are we not on the same page here? >> let me tell you what we understand to the assessment at present. first of all, as you discussed with the president, there is an investigation that the united states government will launch led by the fbi. we want to see the results of that investigation to draw any definitive conclusions.

based on the best information we have to date, what our assessment is as of the present is, in fact, what it began spontaneously in benghazi. >> so she's actually very cautious, you know. lots of caveats. she gets asked specifically if al qaeda might have been involved. she said need further information. we don't know. so a lot of the attacks specifically on her for what she said irng are totally baseless. the other piece of this is the implication is there's some sort of cover-up. that, you know, the president and the administration wanted to hide that this was really a terrorist attack. that just doesn't make sense to me. i don't know why you would want it to be a terrorist attack or a protest and not one or the other. if it was the cover-up, it was the worst cover-up in history since the president called it an act of terror shortly thereafter. >> the right has come way thesis. this is a skablgdz of epic proportions. what's your evidence? we have lots of questions.

questions are not evidence. the questions seem to become evidence, and there's innuendo because this is a cia operation interrupted by terrorism. the cia is never going to tell you everything, so there's lots of room for innuendo and never answers to all the questions. there's still no evidence of a skajd. tragedy? absolutely. scandal? there's nothing. even "the new york times" said today, missteps don't add up to a scandal, and confusion after the fact doesn't constitute a cover-up. what you see so much is the right trying to raise the political price for obama in this, when there's really no there there. we saw some of that with john mccain who has been trying to get to the bottom of benghazi. it's been so important for him, and yet, he skipped the classified hearing about this. why did he skip it? because his office said that he had a previously scheduled engagement. what was that? a press conference where he dissing the president and get

answers. really? >> let's put mccain in perspective here, because he's the point man on capitol hill and really insinuating that there's something, you know not on the up and up going on here with the white house. john mccain is acting out of sour grapes here. that defines his career. think back a decade, but john mccain was ever democrat's favorite republican. why? he ran against george w. bush and he lost, and he didn't take the loss well. when george w. bush made president, john mccain didn't miss a single opportunity to stick it to the bush administration. hard to believe now john mccain in 2001 voted against the bush tax cuts. john mccain in 2001 called for closing the gun show loophole. john mccain in 2001 was pushing for a patient's bill of rights. in 2001 he was flirting with abandoning the republican party and running as an independent in

2004 or even switching to the democratic party. that was john mccain exacting his version on veef revenge fro beating him in 2000. this is a grouchy guy that came back to the senate to use that seat because of sour grapes. i'm just sick of it. >> for many of us, this is not a political issue, and for many of us this is not revenge. there are legitimate questions whether you believe it or not, and there is some evidence that things aren't quite on the up and up. we're getting to the bottom of it. straight ahead, the stock markets respond to the talks at the white house today. in the guest spot a top money manager who oversees billions tells us what he's watching for. gecko (clearing throat) thank you, mr. speaker, uh, members of congress. in celebration of over 75 years of our government employees insurance company, or geico...as most of you know members it.congress. ...i propose savings for everyone! i'm talking hundreds here... and furthermore.. newscaster:breaking news. the gecko is demanding free pudding.

and political parties that are actual parties!? with cake! and presents! ah, that was good. too bad nobody could hear me. geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. now's a good time to think about your options. are you looking for a plan that really meets your needs? and your budget? as you probably know, medicare only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. so consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement plans, they pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs every year. call today to request a free decision guide. with this type of plan, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients... plus, there are no networks, and you'll never need a referral to see a specialist. if you're thinking about

your options, call today. when you call, request your free decision guide. and find the aarp medicare supplement plan that may be right for you. time for citi price rewind. because your daughter really wants that pink castle thing. and you really don't want to pay more than you have to. only citi price rewind automatically searches for the lowest price. and if it finds one, you get refunded the difference. just use your citi card and register your purchase online. have a super sparkly day! ok. [ male announcer ] now all you need is a magic carriage. citi price rewind. buy now. save later.

developing now 30 minutes until the closing bell on wall street. stocks are ending this fall this week on a high note after dropping 5% across the board since the election. a positive outlook from party

leadership on both sides today help move the markets in the right direction. >> i was focusing on how we send a message of confidence to consumers, to the markets in the short run, too. >> i believe we can do this and avert the fiscal cliff that is right in front of us today. >> in the guest spot today, jack ablan, the chief investment officer for bmo private bank. how are you, sir? >> thanks, toure. >> wall street is meeting with the president today. what does wall street want to come out of this negotiation? >> i think they just want a deal. you know, it's funny, the market was kind of upset over the uncertainty and, you know, if weapon don't hawe don't have a deal, obviously we could face an economic downturn very similar. in fact, in some respects worse than the downturn we endured in 2008 and '09.

not the final crisis, but the economic portion. you know, i think right now the best thing we can hope for is some kind of minor negotiation that then bumps the big decisions out to the middle of next year. >> so, jack, i need you to help me to understand something. we've been hearing certainly from republicans and from a lot of members of the business community that debt is a huge problem facing -- that it's a drag on the economy, the deficit as well. we have to deal with it. what the fiscal cliff is is really a closing of the deficit and a lessening of the debt. what's the problem? >> the problem is, you know, what we want to do is balance our budget but keep our economy afloat all at the same time. sthaets really the issue. europe is focused single-handedly. there's little they're doing to stimulate the economy. it's not a surprise that the

entire euro zone now just slipped into recession, and there's no light at the end of the tunnel here. what we're trying to do is here a combination. we want to try to stimulate with monetary policy, with easy money from the fed while trying to balance our budget and try to keep things under control on the fiscal side. so i think the ideal scenario for the stock market would be something that could give us an indication that the budget will be balanced several years out, and that both sides agree we're going to trim entitledmements a raise revenues to a point to balance things but near-term provide a fair amount of stimulus to keep this insip yus recovery moving forward. >> jack, tell me me why wall street wanted romney to win so badly. >> i think the main reason behind wall street's desire for romney, you know, you could argue that the wealthy fat cats

and everything else. but i think the real difference in my mind is the incentives that romney would have placed on businesses. he was rather than tightening regulation, he would have tended to losen regulation. rather than looking at ways to penalize companies that are doing business in other countries, he was looking to try to free up taxes and actually make the u.s., you know, a desirable place for foreign companies to situate themselves. i think the leap of faith -- this is obviously -- was not really bought by the american public was that by freeing up companies to do what it is that they do, eventually we'll have growth and we'll have hiring. but, you know, it's a couple of steps radio moemoved and not qu same connection as putting people to work in infrastructure jobs or something like that. >> so, jack, i've heard an awful lot of panic from certain quarters that i'm a little

puzzled by. it basically says if we go over the so-called fiscal cliff on january 1st, there will be chaos and turmoil in the markets and it will have a destructive impact. what i'm seeing is if we get to january 1st, it's a gradual slope. these are cuts phased in over years. these are tax increases that will go into effect, not all of them immediately, and i think anybody anticipates that any deal that would be struck which would be quickly, would be retro actively cut. everybody that gives up money gets it back. if it causes any gyrations in the market, they would be short term. generally they don't have long-term consequences. i look at this and say, what is the problem if we wait a week or two in january if that improves obama's bargaining position? >> i think we can. if we can wait a week or two into january if, for example, we have some evidence that both sides are in agreement on some things. i think, for example, my

understanding is both sides are in agreement that we want to reinstate the payroll tax. this is a holiday we've had a couple years to help stimulate worker paychecks and mutt more money in people's pockets every week. i think that would come into effect. that will take 3% out of consumer spending in the first quarter aalone. already we have tension gengs this growth we're trying to gauge. you know, i think that if we put it out six months, at least we'll have a grand bargain or chance down the line. >> jacquek, thank you very much. >> thank you. >> that's the view from wall street. next up, the states take on the nation's money troubles. republican governor from utah and montana's democratic governor brian switser are up next. [ female announcer ] today, jason is here

to volunteer to help those in need. when a twinge of back pain surprises him. morning starts in high spirits, but there's a growing pain in his lower back. as lines grow longer, his pain continues to linger. but after a long day of helping others, he gets some helpful advice. just two aleve have the strength to keep back pain away all day. today, jason chose aleve. just two pills for all day pain relief. try aleve d for strong, all day long sinus and headache relief.

try aleve d for strong, all day long (child screaming underwater)... (underwater noises).

we just talked wall street. so let's talk main street. cutting through the on pock liptic fiscal cliff talk, what's on the line for the american family? whatever congress does will directly impact state budgets and there's good news and bad news here. believe it or not, taking a dive off the cliff would increase tax revenues for dozens of states putting money back in state coughe coffers. we're joined by two governors, we have a democrat and republican from the great states of montana and utah respectively. we start with the democratic governor of montana who has guided montana to seven consecutive years of record surpluses, invested more money in k to 12 and higher ed than any previous administration and created more jobs and higher wages than any time in state history. governor, that sounds pretty awesome. >> well, it's aa decent record i

must say. >> tough question out the gate there. so, i just wanted to ask you as you watch these negotiations unfold between congressional leaders and the president, talk of the fiscal cliff, what are the things that really concern you in terms of impact on montana? >> here's the joke. every small business and every family in america has to balance a checkbook. they can't spend more than they take in. there's only 535 individuals in america that can get away with spending more money every year without balancing a checkbook. when you look at a state budget, 85% of all state budgets whether it's utah, montana, new york, or california. it's to educate, incarcerate. if it's not in one of those areas thashgs blowing smoke. in washington, d.c. 20% is social security, 20% is medicare and medicaid, 20% is defense,

and about 13% is taking care of disabled and child tax credits and, of course, lunch programs and et cetera. then you add that, the interest on the debt, that's where the money is. so when these jackals are talking about other kinds of savings, they're just diverting the information away from the real programs that matter. how the heck can we just be ending the longest war in the history of this country and not be talking about serious cuts to defense? it doesn't make any sense. this has become silly talk. >> governor, you're making a lot of sense from where i'm sitting. i want you to talk about the we're going about making this decision, this negotiation with brinksmanship. is that a necessary evil in government or a kor roesive part of the process. >> no, absolutely not. this was created by congress themselves. they knew they didn't center ha discipline, so they created this fiscal cliff with the provision

we're forced to do something later. you know, i don't know if you watched the old popeye stuff, but that's what wimpy did all the time. i would like to pay for my hamburger on tuesday. congress are masters at that. they created this crisis, and now they get to the crisis and they say, oh, whatever shall we do? oh, i know. we'll solve 10% of the crisis, and the other 90% we'll do sometime in the future on tuesday. >> okay. thank you, governor. now wi bring in the governor of utah, republican gary herbert. sir, you just heard the governor talking about our impending fiscal showdown on the hill. is that uncertainty having a similar impact on your constituents? >> there's certainly a lot of uncertainty out there having an impact on america and certainly on american business. i appreciate his common sense approach. he slices through the baloney and gets to the heart of the

matter. washington needs to get their fiscal house in order, i applaud their efforts. i expect they'll have leadership back there and get something done. states will be impacted by what they do do. we in utah are doing very well. we will probably have about a 6% to 7% reduction in nondefense spending, but we'll manage. we hope that they will, in fact, balance the budget. we've, in fact, gone back to congress and said we'll take less money for programs that we use at the state level. we'll take 20% less. we'd like you to cut those strings though and give you more flexibility to be more creative and innovative at the state level, which is what governors and states do. >> your fellow governors were meeting this week out in las vegas. some of your republican governors, haley barbour from mississippi, aa former governor. they spoke out and said they think republicans in washington should be open to the idea of increasing tax rates as part of

a potential compromise with democrats on they see fiscal negotiations. do you share that view. should that be on the table for republican it is? >> i think tax reform needs to be part of the discussion. i think everything should be on the table. i would caution us all that increasing taxes ought to be the last thing we do. we don't have really revenue problems as you heard before. we have a spending problem, and where we have this flickering flame of recovery, i would hate to see a dampening effect of a wet blanket tax increase stifle the economic growth and expansion taking place. we need to be very careful. that being said, there are plenty of loopholes and tax dodges out there that need to be closed which would include a tax increase in the end of it. so i think there is opportunities for them to compromise, which would have some kind of tax reform that needs to be, i think, part of the discussion. >> governor herbert, thanks so much. >> thank you. gradual fiscal slope talks

and republicans. maybe actually kind of open to raising taxes? what is this worldcoming to? changes we've already seen since the election. remember that? it was only last week. match that price. that's her "huge savings" face. yeah. don't worry, i get it all the time. [ male announcer ] we guarantee our low prices. even our black friday prices are backed by ad match. the first and only place to go this black friday.

walmart. till you finish your vegetables. [ clock ticking ] [ male announcer ] there's a better way... v8 v-fusion. vegetable nutrition they need, fruit taste they love. could've had a v8. or...try kids boxes! a regular guy with an irregular heartbeat. the usual, bob? not today. [ male announcer ] bob has afib: atrial fibrillation not caused by a heart valve problem, a condition that puts him at greater risk for a stroke. [ gps ] turn left. i don't think so. [ male announcer ] for years, bob took warfarin, and made a monthly trip to the clinic to get his blood tested. but not anymore. bob's doctor recommended a different option: once-a-day xarelto®. xarelto® is the first and only once-a-day prescription blood thinner for patients with afib not caused by a heart valve problem, that doesn't require routine blood monitoring. like warfarin, xarelto® is proven effective

to reduce the risk of an afib-related stroke. there is limited data on how these drugs compare when warfarin is well managed. no routine blood monitoring means bob can spend his extra time however he likes. new zealand! xarelto® is just one pill a day, taken with the evening meal. and with no dietary restrictions, bob can eat the healthy foods he likes. do not stop taking xarelto® rivaroxaban without talking to the doctor who prescribes it for you. stopping may increase your risk of having a stroke. get medical help right away if you develop any signs or symptoms of bleeding, like unusual bruising or tingling. you may have a higher risk of bleeding if you take xarelto® with aspirin products, nsaids or blood thinners. talk to your doctor before taking xarelto® if you currently have abnormal bleeding. xarelto® can cause bleeding, which can be serious, and rarely may lead to death. you are likely to bruise more easily on xarelto®, and it may take longer for bleeding to stop. tell your doctors you are taking xarelto® before any planned medical or dental procedures.

before starting xarelto®, tell your doctor about any conditions, such as kidney, liver or bleeding problems. ready to change your routine? ask your doctor about once-a-day xarelto®. for more information including cost support options, call 1-888-xarelto or visit goxarelto.com. for more information including cost support options, some people put everything intotheir name on the door, and their heart into their community. small business saturday is a day to show our support. a day to shop at stores owned by our friends and neighbors. and do our part for the businesses that do so much for us. on november 24th, let's get out and shop small. believe it or not, it's been only ten days since the

election, just ten days. doesn't it feel like a lifetime ago? think of all the news cycle has delivered since well. the shirtless fbi guy insanity, the newsy presidential news conference, a hit on topham mass commander and israelis and palestinians on the brink and hearings on capitol hill over the aattack in benghazi, talks about a looming fiscal cliff that could plunge us into another recession if congress does nothing before the new year. oh, my gosh. gradual fiscal slope. i was caught up in the moment there. believe it or not, more than that has changed in more than a matter of days. let's do the backspin thing on this. >> can you do the backspin thing? what would that look like? >> we're going to try and see if it works. if it does, it will be the backsp backspin. >> it was a dance from the '60s that steve knows. >> i think it involved the four tops somehow. >> it was the temptations. >> i think -- what was i going to say here? oh, yeah. my point is, you know, something

i heard from a lot of people after the election is, you know, well, look. obama's still the president and the democrats still run the senate and the republicans run the house. it's the same people. nothing has changed. i think a lot has actually changed in the last ten days, and i think it's not so much about, you know, yes, it's the same people there. it's the same basic partisan balance, but these players, republicans and democrats are actors responding to the cues of their party. i think the mood of the democrats -- they've been emboldened by the victory. you have democrats pushing for an aggressive agenda here. they didn't want xo lose the election by the margin. you have republicans now openly talking about the idea of raising income tax rates, albeit part of a deal they might not vote for. to even have that conversation was absolutely taboo for the last 22 years. you have republicans talking

openly like sean hannity about comprehensive immigration reform. republicans were buking mitt romney over his explanation of defeat saying obama showered gifts on constituency groups. i think that's more than rhetorical. that might be a recognition on the part of republicans that that kind of language has defined their he policies too much for the last four years. we'll see if there's a shift there. i think the ground has changed a lot in the last ten days. >> well, i'm, you know, here in d.c. guys in our nation's capital. i was walking around earlier, and the sun is shining, birding are chirping, democrats and republicans walking arm in arm on the mall together. >> that's not happening. >> that didn't happen. >> i think i saw john boehner and nancy pelosi sharing a rootbeer float out of the same straw at johnny half shell. it's the dawn of a new era. i'm positive about it.

>> a lot of important things happened this week. i wasn't totally shocked by any of them, even though the pets russ scandal was a bit surprising. the thing that shocked me the most was, i went to see "lincoln" and it sucked, it was terrible. it wasn't really about the soul of the country as i was led to believe it was going to be, and daniel day-lewis is incredible, he will be in the best actor oscar race but the film -- i want those 2 1/2 hours back. >> toure, we did like another movie though. >> "argo." >> i saw it. >> three thumbs up from "the cycle crew cycle" crew, krystal hasn't seen it yet. >> we were concerned that after the election we would have nothing to talk about, and that's not been a problem. i mean, even on oyour crazy lon

list, romney thrusting himself back into the spotlight, even boehner and obama shared a light-hearted tomorrow. >> tomorrow is speaker boehner's birthday. for those who want to wish him a happy birthday, we won't embarrass him with a cake because we didn't know how many candles were needed, but -- >> yeah, right. >> but we do want to wish him a happy birthday. >> and look at that. i don't think boehner even cried, so that was a nice moment and you know what? we have a member of our team who has his birthday, brian, tomorrow. we also did not get him cake but we did get him some wonderful italian food which was delicious i have to say, so happy birthday, brian. >> i'm ready for brian to say thank you. >> thank you in our ear. we heard it, nobody else heard

it. >> a very professional moment we had. >> we love brian, we couldn't do it without you. >> great week for america and i mean, i actually am hopeful and optimistic that there's going to be some movement. i think republicans, to steve's point, have recognized that they can't hold the position of just defending tax cuts for the wealthy. i think the president has put them on the respond and -- spot and i think once he's not running for re-election, he will not cave. >> they just have to go see "argo" together. >> and jimmy carter wins in the end. >> stay through the credits because there's carter -- it's interesting. anyway, up next, speaking of movies, toure's pitch for petraeus, the movie. see if there's a jimmy carter cameo in that. there's a tease for you. ♪ if it wasn't for you ♪ don't know what i'd do

♪ i'd have nothing to prove ♪ i'd have nothing to lose [ male announcer ] zales is the diamond store. take an extra 10 percent off storewide, now through sunday.

i just finished a bowl of your new light chicken pot pie soup and it's so rich and creamy... is it really 100 calories? let me put you on webcan... ...lean roasted chicken... and a creamy broth mmm i can still see you. [ male announcer ] progresso. you gotta taste this soup.

that makes tv even better. if your tv were a prom queen, zeebox would be a stretch limo.

with this enchanting union, comes a sunroof she can scream from... i'm goin' to prom! [ male announcer ] ...and a driver named bruce that she can re-name james... faster, james! [ male announcer ] ...just 'cause. download zeebox free, and have the night of your life with your tv. i thought you ought to hear it. >> we open our sights. >> the graduate, part two. >> mrs. robinson had a stroke so she can't talk. >> it's going to be funny? >> yeah, it will be funny. >> do you want to hear a pitch because i got a pitch. picture this, a movie that must be made because it's got everything. it's the gritty war scenes of "the hurt locker" meets "tinker tailor solgd soldier spy." it's got generals and wives with wandering eyes and a weirdly obsessed fbi agent. we'll call it, i don't know, dogs of war on the spy who loved me or the dirty dozen or body

heat or the year of living dangerously or the love pentagon or how paula got her groove back. something. we'll figure it out. but you get steve buscemi to play general petraeus. he's got the look and this way of giving you a deep inner sliminess. the paula broadwell role is so juicy. you know who has to win, angie jolie. the sex appeal, the toughness. can't you see the scenes of her and the general running through the mountains of afghanistan during which they find a cave and do some cardio. back at home we see the wife, holly petraeus, played by kathy bates. we get bruce willis to play general allen because his entrance makes the story even more bizarre. and to play jill kelley, the hot wife who unnerved the tough broadwell and made an fbi agent go mad and called the fbi launching the whole investigation i would would point back to her, we get, yep,

kim kardashian. so what if she can't act. no one can resist her. a general is sending her thousands of e-mails, the sfib sending her shirtless photos, and who will play him, that fbi agent? that's a no-brainer. the situation. we get tom cruise as eric cantor, the congressman who knew before the election, and will smith as the president who didn't know until afterward. but this movie isn't just about war and spies and elicit nook can i. it it's about also the media. you bring back '80s star max headroom. >> this is max headroom and what you're about to witness is one of the most sinister sounding intros to a trailer to one of the greatest epics ever produced in the history of television. >> from inside his box he is chasing the story with the same lust as our soldiers and wives who are chasing each other because this story is the shiny object the media couldn't resist even though there was no crime, no classified information, no

conspiracy. never mind the drones and counter insurgency, but when the sex arrived, so did the team coverage. it had to be a hollywood movie because it's dramatic, it's salacious, and it's inconsequential. we're going to need a director. that's easy. oliver stone. he'll overlay the conspiracy theories that really don't apply but will keep the story seeming like a balanced meal when it's really just dessert. the only question left is this, if martin bashir was the head of a hollywood studio, would he give me $40 million and green light this bad boy? >> the answer is no. i prefer reality to fiction. thank you very much. and thank you, toure. good afternoon. it's friday, november the 16th, and the republican party is quickly slipping into a dark and dangerous corner. please, somebody, help them. >> if you give a bunch of money from the government to a group and guess what? they'll vote for you. >> i think he's right on the money. >>